Hi Marten!

I have developed a patch for memcached 1.4.x that splits memcached's
slab store into metadata and data bits, so that the key/values can
live on flash without a tremendous performance penalty.  Ultimately, I
predict the best solution will be to use the storage engine branch and/
or Northscale's membase, but for the time being the patch works pretty
well.  I'll send you a private email with more info.

thanks!
Mitch (from Fusion-io)

On Jul 9, 10:01 am, Marten Lehmann <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I know that memcached is designed to get its speed from the fast
> access to RAM. But RAM is still very expensive - even with the amount
> of RAM you get for the same money increasing every year.
>
> When I thought of using PCIe SSDs instead of RAM I wasn't doing this
> with regard to persistence of objects. I just noticed, that the Fusion-
> io's ioDrives are working with near-RAM speed, having the PCIe bus as
> the only bottleneck in speed (don't mix it up with SATA SSDs). An
> ioDrive 160 GB with SLC memory is available for less than $6,000 and
> is capable to perform more than 100,000 random IOPS (read and write),
> whereas with ECC RAM you'd have to pay a multiple of that amount the
> get the same ressources.
>
> I don't know of any way to use a block device (like the ioDrive) as
> RAM, you can only use RAM as a block device (which doesn't help in
> this situation). So for the emerging market of PCIe SSDs (many high
> performance databases are using this as replacement for RAID 10 arrays
> and large RAM) it would be necessary to extend or branch memcached to
> support SSD block devices.
>
> Did someone start with that, is this possibly already on the roadmap,
> or did the maintainers refuse to extend memcache with this option for
> a reason?
>
> Btw.: We are using memcached in conjunction with nginx as a web proxy
> to our backend webservers to cache images and other static files,
> which improves performance a lot. But 64 GB of RAM is much more
> expensiv than 160 GB of an ioDrive PCIe SSD.
>
> Kind regards
> Marten

Reply via email to